SOE, why have you destroyed ACT? - Page 2

Aule · 06-30-2009, 05:54 PM

In the context of raiding with ACT, required doesn't necessarily "you must have or you will fail", it means "to be fully optimized you must use". The same way people claim you don't need (currently) 4-5 bards and 4 enchanters to raid. You don't, but to optimize your raid you're going to aim for having it. To the people saying you don't need ACT to raid successfully. I challenge you to raid all of your normal content with no timers from ACT. Just once is fine, but clear all your normal content either using stopwatches or just guessing when the aoe's going to occur. Then you can come back and say it's not required. Timers are necessary because we have detrimental effects that can kill you within 2 seconds if not immediately cured. We have curses that result in you being one shotted next hit. We have fights that have the optimal time to cast cure curse as being 1 second before the curse lands. We have aoe's that will kill almost anybody who's within 15m of the mob when it fires, etc. I dunno about the rest of you, but MY raids include a steady patter of what aoes are due next, how soon, which one's next, you have 20 seconds to get in there and do some dps before getting out, get out now, move move move, we got 45 seconds let's get a good burn, etc.

Yimway · 06-30-2009, 06:03 PM

feldon30 wrote:

Atan@Unrest wrote:
I'm sure everyone in the game is confortable enough with regular expressions to make those filters work, and I know managing 6 seperate stop watch timers and cross refferencing my timer spreadsheet while doing my raid job shouldn't cut down on my effectiveness all that much.
ROFLMAO that's classic man. Yeah, I'm sure everyone can just break out the stopwatches and timers and keep up with 3-6 AoEs and effects just based on some emotes in the chat log.

=)

Switchmaster without ACT is just the suck. He has a nasty habbit of resisting swipes due to many different things, and a missed swipe causing an out of position hit on his lesser aoe will yield deadly results if its anywhere near his heavier aoe.

Parsing the swipeable timer on top of the unswipeable on the fly while coordinating with multiple rogues on who was resisted or not in between the 38s unswipable, must instacure, aoe just isn't going to be remotely as successful as using a parse tool to do that for you.

Can switchmaster be killed without ACT? Sure, he can. But he can also be killed with a Monk MT. Are either of which advisable as the best way to achieve repeatable success? Not remotely.

Aule · 06-30-2009, 06:13 PM

I'd be curious to know, though doubt if such information would be released, if script designers for boss fights develop the fight with the assumption that the raid that will be fighting said mob is using ACT. My instinct is that, from TSO forward at least, the answer is "Yes".

Kordran · 06-30-2009, 06:16 PM

Aule@Guk wrote:

In the context of raiding with ACT, required doesn't necessarily "you must have or you will fail", it means "to be fully optimized you must use".

When it is claimed that something is "required" does not mean something should be used, or is beneficial to use; it means that it must be used. And that clearly is not the case. Let's not redefine words here.

Is ACT recommended for raiding? Yes, absolutely. Does it offer significant benefits and advantages in completing difficult raid content? Most definitely. Does raiding without ACT increase the chance of failure? Unquestionably. But it is still not required to raid, just as a hammer is not required to pound in a nail, but few would question that you're better off using one rather than trying to pound it in with your fist.

Yimway · 06-30-2009, 06:17 PM

Aule@Guk wrote:

I'd be curious to know, though doubt if such information would be released, if script designers for boss fights develop the fight with the assumption that the raid that will be fighting said mob is using ACT. My instinct is that, from TSO forward at least, the answer is "Yes".

Absolutely.

The existance of aoe timing tools necesitate making more aoe's and detrimental effects to continue to add new dificulty. Early on AoE's were a survivability check, not a timer check, we quickly switched out to making raid AoE's a 'line dancing' skill check rather than a resist check since thats how the players were working around it.

Aule · 06-30-2009, 06:51 PM

Kordran wrote:

Aule@Guk wrote:
In the context of raiding with ACT, required doesn't necessarily "you must have or you will fail", it means "to be fully optimized you must use".
When it is claimed that something is "required" does not mean something should be used, or is beneficial to use; it means that it must be used. And that clearly is not the case. Let's not redefine words here.
Is ACT recommended for raiding? Yes, absolutely. Does it offer significant benefits and advantages in completing difficult raid content? Most definitely. Does raiding without ACT increase the chance of failure? Unquestionably. But it is still not required to raid, just as a hammer is not required to pound in a nail, but few would question that you're better off using one rather than trying to pound it in with your fist.

From a progression point of view, what would your stance be on whether ACT is required for a guild to be able to progress to the next stage?

Let's take a guild that is earlier on the progression tree. Perhaps they have killed the Naga, twins in Palace, and the Stalker in YIS, I think we can agree that all of this is doable without timers. If a friend of yours from a guild in that position asked you for advice on progression and you found out that their guild was not using ACT. Would you tell that person that their guild NEEDS to begin using ACT to time AOE's? Would you rate them any chance of successfully moving on to killing Switchmaster, Kultak and Xebnok without timers?

Again, this is for a guild at that level of progression. I'm sure many guilds well past that progression point could simply power through the aoe's and rightfully state that timers are not necessary for that fight. Just as avatar guilds can state that killing Zarakon only takes 2 fighters and that bringing more is stupid.

Using your nail example, if a carpenter showed up at your house to do some remodeling and you saw them using a rock instead of a hammer and their eyeball as a level, would you not question why they were not using adequate tools to perform their job effectively? Or would you applaud their hardcore style?

Thunndar316 · 06-30-2009, 07:11 PM

If the game gave visual or audio clues you wouldn't have to use ACT. I never have to fire up something in the background to play Ninja Gaiden. Not sure why this game has to be so vague and secretive. Shouldn't have to go back and read logs, study this, min max that, ect. Just wanna play.

Yimway · 06-30-2009, 07:41 PM

Thunndar316 wrote:

If the game gave visual or audio clues you wouldn't have to use ACT. I never have to fire up something in the background to play Ninja Gaiden. Not sure why this game has to be so vague and secretive. Shouldn't have to go back and read logs, study this, min max that, ect. Just wanna play.

Queue's would have to work on every graphics setting and be clearly observable accross a wide spectrum of configurations.

Or they can be text, but who likes reading?

Macross_JR · 06-30-2009, 08:04 PM

also the queue's would have to not be effect by ca's/spells that makes the mob change casting animation.

Quicksilver74 · 06-30-2009, 08:10 PM

Atan@Unrest wrote:

Sure, he can. But he can also be killed with a Monk MT. Are either of which advisable as the best way to achieve repeatable success? Not remotely.

Oh no he didn't just go there....

Trevalon · 06-30-2009, 08:36 PM

Ranja wrote:

Trevalon wrote:
Kordran wrote:
vinere wrote:
If they want to make act not required.... all mobs need to have a emote 5 sec before a raidwipeing ae... like maestro and his root ~_~ until thats implementied.. ACT is required 4sure =I
ACT is not required. You could essentially do the same kinds of things by filtering text, watching your detrimentals and using a stopwatch. ACT is a convenience for experienced raiders and a crutch for inexperienced ones, but not an absolute requirement.
While ACT is nice, I agree it is NOT required ...
How you people function in this day and age is beyond me -- Back when EQ1 was first released there was none of this ACT or mod crap -- You counted in your head - Raid Leaders set up clocks and watches and we had every single raid announcement macro'd out cause guess what? No Vent...
Its sick how dependent this new generation of gamers is on having to be warned by 3rd party software - It has made all these games easier and the players are much worse than we used to be.
I bet you walked uphill both ways to school to when you were a kid.
Get over the goold old days. I love these types of post.

Yea we did - and I guarantee you we are better players thanMOST of the current players for it...Ive led alot of end-game guilds over the years I can tell you there is generally no better player than an EQ1 veteran...

Secondly, I never said it was the "good old days" all I said is that you kids are just not the same caliber of player that they used to be. We have all (Myself included) become lazy and we are worse off because of it.

In reponse to watch comments: lol, true that, I guess it is a "3rd Party Device" SMILEY

Deson · 06-30-2009, 08:40 PM

Trevalon wrote:

Ranja wrote:
Trevalon wrote:
Kordran wrote:
vinere wrote:
If they want to make act not required.... all mobs need to have a emote 5 sec before a raidwipeing ae... like maestro and his root ~_~ until thats implementied.. ACT is required 4sure =I
ACT is not required. You could essentially do the same kinds of things by filtering text, watching your detrimentals and using a stopwatch. ACT is a convenience for experienced raiders and a crutch for inexperienced ones, but not an absolute requirement.
While ACT is nice, I agree it is NOT required ...
How you people function in this day and age is beyond me -- Back when EQ1 was first released there was none of this ACT or mod crap -- You counted in your head - Raid Leaders set up clocks and watches and we had every single raid announcement macro'd out cause guess what? No Vent...
Its sick how dependent this new generation of gamers is on having to be warned by 3rd party software - It has made all these games easier and the players are much worse than we used to be.
I bet you walked uphill both ways to school to when you were a kid.
Get over the goold old days. I love these types of post.
Yea we did - and I guarantee you we are better players thanMOST of the current players for it...Ive led alot of end-game guilds over the years I can tell you there is generally no better player than an EQ1 veteran...
Secondly, I never said it was the "good old days" all I said is that you kids are just not the same caliber of player that they used to be. We have all (Myself included) become lazy and we are worse off because of it.
In reponse to watch comments: lol, true that, I guess it is a "3rd Party Device"

That sounds like Dymus...

Kordran · 06-30-2009, 11:35 PM

Aule@Guk wrote:

From a progression point of view, what would your stance be on whether ACT is required for a guild to be able to progress to the next stage?
Let's take a guild that is earlier on the progression tree. Perhaps they have killed the Naga, twins in Palace, and the Stalker in YIS, I think we can agree that all of this is doable without timers. If a friend of yours from a guild in that position asked you for advice on progression and you found out that their guild was not using ACT. Would you tell that person that their guild NEEDS to begin using ACT to time AOE's? Would you rate them any chance of successfully moving on to killing Switchmaster, Kultak and Xebnok without timers?
Again, this is for a guild at that level of progression. I'm sure many guilds well past that progression point could simply power through the aoe's and rightfully state that timers are not necessary for that fight. Just as avatar guilds can state that killing Zarakon only takes 2 fighters and that bringing more is stupid.
Using your nail example, if a carpenter showed up at your house to do some remodeling and you saw them using a rock instead of a hammer and their eyeball as a level, would you not question why they were not using adequate tools to perform their job effectively? Or would you applaud their hardcore style?

I would tell them that using ACT is strongly recommended, and that they would be foolish to not use it. But again, it's not an absolute requirement, it's just an incredibly useful tool. Just like the guy pounding the hammers in with a rock, if that's how he prefers to do it, fine, as long as he's not remodeling my house.

Calris · 07-01-2009, 12:10 AM

feldon30 wrote:

kela wrote:
Why should SoE be responcable for making sure a Third Party program accually works.
Because raiding EQ2 requires a third party program -- ACT.

Which is why tons of people do just fine without it. If you think it's required, you're using it as a crutch to shore up lack of skill.

Kordran · 07-01-2009, 01:01 AM

And honestly, this whole discussion about the usefulness of ACT is beside the point. There is nothing wrong with ACT, there is nothing wrong with the logfile output from the client. Auto-attack damage is still being logged. Timers still work. Life goes on.

Edit: And I can't spell..

Jeepned2 · 07-01-2009, 02:49 AM

Ok, I know there are lovers and haters of ACT out there. Everyone seems to have an opinion about even if they have never tried using it before. I'm starting to wonder if Aditu knew how it was going to evolve and the love hate relationship that it has become, if she would have ever let it be known that she wrote the program. Here is a little something that is on her website that give a little history about ACT. I didn't ask her before hand if I post it, but hope it's ok with her. It is located on her ACT website, that unfortunately I can't link to. Some rule about links. I get in enough trouble with the moderators as is. SO....

"ACT started as a learning project to teach myself C# after I first started playing EQ2 in November of 2004. At the time there were very few offerings for log parsers if any. Those that did exist did only basic things at best. I had not started raiding yet, being barely level 15 but I knew from EQ1 that it would be in my future and in order to better understand how the game worked, I would need a reliable log parser. That is essentially the purpose behind the program, to better understand the game. Being a Templar, I did not have a particular care about how much damage I could output in a certain amount of time. Even though that is a popular misconception on the limits of log parsers. As ACT was a learning project, I never had immediate plans on releasing it to the public. I certainly didn't foresee the eventual popularity or even controversy that it would cause." Aditu from her Advanced Combat Tracker website.

I'm sure she had no idea back then that ACT would turn out being the discussion of many posts on this forum. This is me just guessing now, but I believe a lot of what caused ACT to become what it is today is people asking her for ACT to do more and more things. I'm guessing also that it just kind of snowballed on her over time. It has to take her a huge amount of her time for updates and everything else that is done with ACT. For as far as I know, it's not like she has some company with a bunch of other people helping with it. But then again, I never asked.

All I can tell you is that she is one of the smartest guildmates I have ever had when it comes to understanding all things EQ2. I learned a long time ago not to argue with her in guild chat, unless I just felt the huge need to have my ego crushed that day.

ACT has made raiding easier. There is no way around that. I guess I'm confused as to why that's a bad thing. It's just simple evolution. Kind of like going from biplanes (early EQ) to jets (current EQ2) and who knows what next year will bring? Do the Dev's develope content differently because of ACT? I don't know, you would have to ask.... and get an answer from them. (Good luck). For those who talk about the "Good ole days" raiding in EQ, I was one of them also, but hey, time to move on. We have indoor plumbing now, you're allow to come in and join the rest of us.

Spyderbite · 07-01-2009, 03:01 AM

Jeepned2 wrote:

Do the Dev's develope content differently because of ACT?

I doubt the devs take any third party programs into consideration. Which is a good thing. It restricts their ability to develop stuff based on newer technology.

I realize that this is a time investment on the the 3rd party's part to adapt to the changes. But, if it becomes too much of a burden then they can either retire the application, code the application to adapt to the changes, or start charging money for use of the application.

Anybody who has a problem with it, can easily code their own application. Especially if its that vital to any aspect of the game. (I use ACT for harvesting reasons btw)

Gnova · 07-01-2009, 03:22 AM

Thunndar316 wrote:

If the game gave visual or audio clues you wouldn't have to use ACT. I never have to fire up something in the background to play Ninja Gaiden. Not sure why this game has to be so vague and secretive. Shouldn't have to go back and read logs, study this, min max that, ect. Just wanna play.

/agree

One example for this would be the Nex fight. They could have put a "aura" around her that changed colour when your raidforce went above or below the dps thresholds. Let the raidforce stare at the raid target and not at a parse screen on a 2nd monitor to be effective.

I did notice at FF that the new animations we were shown had a lot of visual triggers in them just prior to the actual attack. Hopefully allowing playing to take cues from the attack animations for aoes etc..., is the purpose.

EQ1 people talking about how "hard" they had it lol? I remember when the simple act of someone having to click a mask when a raidmob gave a emote that the ingame audio triggers could pick up and tell the player to do it used to caused wipes.

Gnova · 07-01-2009, 03:33 AM

Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:

I doubt the devs take any third party programs into consideration. Which is a good thing. It restricts their ability to develop stuff based on newer technology.

Absolutely they take ACT into considerations when designing raid encounters.

First they had timed aoes. People started using act to time them to make them trivial.

Then they decide to have multiple aoes with separate timers so that it would be even more difficult. People eventually got used to them.

Now they have multiple aoes and random whack-a-mole reactive detrimentals so that there is even more to concentrate on since ACT has made aoe jousting trivial, except when the named crosses the streams and bad things happen. Then they add curses to the equation so that people couldn't just self cure.

What is next?

Morghus · 07-01-2009, 03:35 AM

Gnova wrote:

Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:
I doubt the devs take any third party programs into consideration. Which is a good thing. It restricts their ability to develop stuff based on newer technology.
What is next?

From FF:

Curing Whack-a-mole ——- Effects that if you cure, it switches to a different effect Some effects you don’t have to cure Some effects you shouldn’t cure ——–

Armawk · 07-01-2009, 03:38 AM

Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:

I doubt the devs take any third party programs into consideration. Which is a good thing. It restricts their ability to develop stuff based on newer technology.

I would be astonished (in fact I would flatly not believe it) if they didnt take into account something so basic as knowing that their raiders will have everything recorded, timed etc. especailly given that devs often refer to parses.. which means act lets face it.

Zarador · 07-01-2009, 08:20 AM

shaunfletcher wrote:

Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:
I doubt the devs take any third party programs into consideration. Which is a good thing. It restricts their ability to develop stuff based on newer technology.
I would be astonished (in fact I would flatly not believe it) if they didnt take into account something so basic as knowing that their raiders will have everything recorded, timed etc. especailly given that devs often refer to parses.. which means act lets face it.

I guess I just look at it the same as I do with UI Mods. It's 3rd party and unless there is a special implied relationship between SoE and the 3rd party, sometimes it's going to conflict and "break". The *best* way I would imagine to insure rapid repair by the 3rd party programmer would be to support the mod programmers as to provide them with a greater incentive as well as showing that their work is appreciated.

It's ironic in many cases when I read the boards over at EQ Interface that some of the most widely used mods out there that players claim they can't play the game without and that have been downloaded thousands of times have to beg for contributions.

Levatino · 07-01-2009, 09:14 AM

that's a true statement and not only for programmers of third party software for EQ2. Lots of people want everything for free. So what if making such is time and money consuming so long they get it for free and on time. Cause god forbid if an update (for ACt in this case) don't comes in time..

Also complaining to SOE for third party stuff not being compatible? Hello it's called third party for a reason.. Maybe write something yourself then? What to difficult? Well then you have to wait until ACT or whatecer third-party program comes with an update...

Or you could always try to play the game without ofcourse.. Try it you may succeed..

Yimway · 07-01-2009, 11:27 AM

Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:

Jeepned2 wrote:
Do the Dev's develope content differently because of ACT?
I doubt the devs take any third party programs into consideration. Which is a good thing. It restricts their ability to develop stuff based on newer technology.

They do take into concideration what constitutes a challenge and what is trivial. And when ACT made certain raid mechanics trivial, they designed new ones to create challenge.

While they didn't look at ACT and develop differently, they looked at needing to challenge players who were clearly using ACT, so yes ACT caused things to be developed differently.

liveja · 07-01-2009, 11:29 AM

Spyderbite@Venekor wrote:

Jeepned2 wrote:
Do the Dev's develope content differently because of ACT?
I doubt the devs take any third party programs into consideration.

I don't see how they couldn't take them, particularly ACT, into consideration.

Sprin · 07-01-2009, 12:53 PM

Trevalon wrote:

Kordran wrote:
vinere wrote:
If they want to make act not required.... all mobs need to have a emote 5 sec before a raidwipeing ae... like maestro and his root ~_~ until thats implementied.. ACT is required 4sure =I
ACT is not required. You could essentially do the same kinds of things by filtering text, watching your detrimentals and using a stopwatch. ACT is a convenience for experienced raiders and a crutch for inexperienced ones, but not an absolute requirement.
While ACT is nice, I agree it is NOT required ...
How you people function in this day and age is beyond me -- Back when EQ1 was first released there was none of this ACT or mod crap -- You counted in your head - Raid Leaders set up clocks and watches and we had every single raid announcement macro'd out cause guess what? No Vent...
Its sick how dependent this new generation of gamers is on having to be warned by 3rd party software - It has made all these games easier and the players are much worse than we used to be.

LOLZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Some OLD, wanna-look-tough guy who thinks old, out dated things are better, and "evolution / progression / technology" are lame and make you weak wrote:

You young whippersnappers these days and your fancy "computers" and "electricity"!!.. back when i was a boy, If we had to talk to someone, we had to walk 20 miles in one direction and knock on their door.. it was more effective than these whatcha-ma-phones they have now adays... It made you into a man... now you weenies just can type things on that big glowing electric box and send v-mails or whatever you call them.
Back before electricity things were run smoother and more efficient and effective. We were better people because of it... though we died younger because of diseases and lack of refridgeration made storing food for long periods of time impossible, oh and the lack of any antibiotics or other medication for treating illnesses... but dag-nabit, we were better because of it!.. This hogwash with the talk of "progression" and "evolution"... it makes everyone weak... It was better when you didnt have any wheels, using these fancy "automobiles" to get around... It has made getting to the store easier and all the youngsters much worse then we used to be at getting to the store.

Saying that people are weaker/lazy/dumb for using technology is like that old crotchety doctor that still uses his old rusty tools to do a surgery, "cuz thats how it was done in the olden days, so its better"... vs a Doctor that uses the state of the art computers and equipment available to him... which would you think was "stupid and lazy"? Thats what I thought... kk thnx bbyenow

Sprin · 07-01-2009, 01:01 PM

And in case any Devs read this forums, cuz they certainly dont read Priest General Forums:

http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=452255

Request to get rid of the garbage "lore" clutter in the combat logs and replace it with usefull information, like cures mainly... and after that, if there is room, accurate debuff logs...

Thanks Sony... you're a doll

Tehom · 07-01-2009, 02:50 PM

It's not like using a stopwatch to time AEs in EQ1 was some difficult thing. One of my first complaints about EQ2 was that the /time command didn't give seconds so you couldn't use a macro for a timer like you could in EQ1.

ACT is an incredibly useful tool, there's no denying that. Aditu deserves endless praise for her all her work in creating it. But I think by far the most useful features of it are for data analysis in determining how mechanics work or the value of different spells and so on, not just for timing AEs or similar things. That's just a small side benefit.

Gilasil · 07-01-2009, 02:52 PM

I agree ACT is not absolutely required. I don't use it myself (for timing attacks I have a window set to show only my own attacks so I can see when the autoattack goes off, on raids OTHERS are doing the timing so I'm not techinally using it and sometimes they DO use stopwatches. We're not very uber. SMILEY )

It does make life more enjoyable for many players. SoE should either (1) add its functionality to the GUI or (2) design the game so it doesn't have such a huge impact -- i.e. get rid of DPS caps, have emotes before raid wiping AoEs, design autoattack so careful timing is not necessary for maximizing DPS. If they go the second route they should require that all beta testers (those on Test servers and anyone in any beta) NOT have ACT installed -- have something in the GUI which checks for that and refuses to launch if ACT is installed.

But until then the fact remains that gameplay is becoming heavily dependent on a third party program. Ok, since this is the same people who brought us grey shard quests I suppose they might not see a problem with that.

ZerkerDwarf · 07-01-2009, 06:26 PM

I am looking into my localized log file. What do I see? No auto attack (a big file after a right night). Furthermore the localized log file declares all damage and hits to be "1".

Probably because no auto attack is logged I am complaining about auto attack not being logged? Of course then there are still some people saying auto attack is logged properly.

Maybe the localized log file HAS indeed been bug-patched?!

No, of course not. I look into my file and SEE the bugs. But other people maintain everything is fine.

06-30-2009, 05:54 PM	#31
Aule Server: Guk Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 1,360	In the context of raiding with ACT, required doesn't necessarily "you must have or you will fail", it means "to be fully optimized you must use". The same way people claim you don't need (currently) 4-5 bards and 4 enchanters to raid. You don't, but to optimize your raid you're going to aim for having it. To the people saying you don't need ACT to raid successfully. I challenge you to raid all of your normal content with no timers from ACT. Just once is fine, but clear all your normal content either using stopwatches or just guessing when the aoe's going to occur. Then you can come back and say it's not required. Timers are necessary because we have detrimental effects that can kill you within 2 seconds if not immediately cured. We have curses that result in you being one shotted next hit. We have fights that have the optimal time to cast cure curse as being 1 second before the curse lands. We have aoe's that will kill almost anybody who's within 15m of the mob when it fires, etc. I dunno about the rest of you, but MY raids include a steady patter of what aoes are due next, how soon, which one's next, you have 20 seconds to get in there and do some dps before getting out, get out now, move move move, we got 45 seconds let's get a good burn, etc. __________________ guk.Aule - 90 coercer \| Troops of Doom \| 90 bruiser - guk.Krindi

06-30-2009, 06:03 PM	#32
Yimway Loremaster Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 9,707	feldon30 wrote: Atan@Unrest wrote: I'm sure everyone in the game is confortable enough with regular expressions to make those filters work, and I know managing 6 seperate stop watch timers and cross refferencing my timer spreadsheet while doing my raid job shouldn't cut down on my effectiveness all that much. ROFLMAO that's classic man. Yeah, I'm sure everyone can just break out the stopwatches and timers and keep up with 3-6 AoEs and effects just based on some emotes in the chat log. =) Switchmaster without ACT is just the suck. He has a nasty habbit of resisting swipes due to many different things, and a missed swipe causing an out of position hit on his lesser aoe will yield deadly results if its anywhere near his heavier aoe. Parsing the swipeable timer on top of the unswipeable on the fly while coordinating with multiple rogues on who was resisted or not in between the 38s unswipable, must instacure, aoe just isn't going to be remotely as successful as using a parse tool to do that for you. Can switchmaster be killed without ACT? Sure, he can. But he can also be killed with a Monk MT. Are either of which advisable as the best way to achieve repeatable success? Not remotely. __________________

06-30-2009, 06:13 PM	#33
Aule Server: Guk Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 1,360	I'd be curious to know, though doubt if such information would be released, if script designers for boss fights develop the fight with the assumption that the raid that will be fighting said mob is using ACT. My instinct is that, from TSO forward at least, the answer is "Yes". __________________ guk.Aule - 90 coercer \| Troops of Doom \| 90 bruiser - guk.Krindi

06-30-2009, 06:16 PM	#34
Kordran Loremaster Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 2,484	Aule@Guk wrote: In the context of raiding with ACT, required doesn't necessarily "you must have or you will fail", it means "to be fully optimized you must use". When it is claimed that something is "required" does not mean something should be used, or is beneficial to use; it means that it must be used. And that clearly is not the case. Let's not redefine words here. Is ACT recommended for raiding? Yes, absolutely. Does it offer significant benefits and advantages in completing difficult raid content? Most definitely. Does raiding without ACT increase the chance of failure? Unquestionably. But it is still not required to raid, just as a hammer is not required to pound in a nail, but few would question that you're better off using one rather than trying to pound it in with your fist. __________________

06-30-2009, 06:17 PM	#35
Yimway Loremaster Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 9,707	Aule@Guk wrote: I'd be curious to know, though doubt if such information would be released, if script designers for boss fights develop the fight with the assumption that the raid that will be fighting said mob is using ACT. My instinct is that, from TSO forward at least, the answer is "Yes". Absolutely. The existance of aoe timing tools necesitate making more aoe's and detrimental effects to continue to add new dificulty. Early on AoE's were a survivability check, not a timer check, we quickly switched out to making raid AoE's a 'line dancing' skill check rather than a resist check since thats how the players were working around it. __________________

06-30-2009, 06:51 PM	#36
Aule Server: Guk Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 1,360	Kordran wrote: Aule@Guk wrote: In the context of raiding with ACT, required doesn't necessarily "you must have or you will fail", it means "to be fully optimized you must use". When it is claimed that something is "required" does not mean something should be used, or is beneficial to use; it means that it must be used. And that clearly is not the case. Let's not redefine words here. Is ACT recommended for raiding? Yes, absolutely. Does it offer significant benefits and advantages in completing difficult raid content? Most definitely. Does raiding without ACT increase the chance of failure? Unquestionably. But it is still not required to raid, just as a hammer is not required to pound in a nail, but few would question that you're better off using one rather than trying to pound it in with your fist. From a progression point of view, what would your stance be on whether ACT is required for a guild to be able to progress to the next stage? Let's take a guild that is earlier on the progression tree. Perhaps they have killed the Naga, twins in Palace, and the Stalker in YIS, I think we can agree that all of this is doable without timers. If a friend of yours from a guild in that position asked you for advice on progression and you found out that their guild was not using ACT. Would you tell that person that their guild NEEDS to begin using ACT to time AOE's? Would you rate them any chance of successfully moving on to killing Switchmaster, Kultak and Xebnok without timers? Again, this is for a guild at that level of progression. I'm sure many guilds well past that progression point could simply power through the aoe's and rightfully state that timers are not necessary for that fight. Just as avatar guilds can state that killing Zarakon only takes 2 fighters and that bringing more is stupid. Using your nail example, if a carpenter showed up at your house to do some remodeling and you saw them using a rock instead of a hammer and their eyeball as a level, would you not question why they were not using adequate tools to perform their job effectively? Or would you applaud their hardcore style? __________________ guk.Aule - 90 coercer \| Troops of Doom \| 90 bruiser - guk.Krindi

06-30-2009, 07:11 PM	#37
Thunndar316 Loremaster Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 1,681	If the game gave visual or audio clues you wouldn't have to use ACT. I never have to fire up something in the background to play Ninja Gaiden. Not sure why this game has to be so vague and secretive. Shouldn't have to go back and read logs, study this, min max that, ect. Just wanna play. __________________ Sleight of Hand is USELESS

06-30-2009, 07:41 PM	#38
Yimway Loremaster Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 9,707	Thunndar316 wrote: If the game gave visual or audio clues you wouldn't have to use ACT. I never have to fire up something in the background to play Ninja Gaiden. Not sure why this game has to be so vague and secretive. Shouldn't have to go back and read logs, study this, min max that, ect. Just wanna play. Queue's would have to work on every graphics setting and be clearly observable accross a wide spectrum of configurations. Or they can be text, but who likes reading? __________________

06-30-2009, 08:04 PM	#39
Macross_JR Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 547	also the queue's would have to not be effect by ca's/spells that makes the mob change casting animation. __________________

06-30-2009, 08:10 PM	#40
Quicksilver74 Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 1,640	Atan@Unrest wrote: Sure, he can. But he can also be killed with a Monk MT. Are either of which advisable as the best way to achieve repeatable success? Not remotely. Oh no he didn't just go there....

06-30-2009, 08:36 PM	#41
Trevalon Loremaster Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 286	Ranja wrote: Trevalon wrote: Kordran wrote: vinere wrote: If they want to make act not required.... all mobs need to have a emote 5 sec before a raidwipeing ae... like maestro and his root ~_~ until thats implementied.. ACT is required 4sure =I ACT is not required. You could essentially do the same kinds of things by filtering text, watching your detrimentals and using a stopwatch. ACT is a convenience for experienced raiders and a crutch for inexperienced ones, but not an absolute requirement. While ACT is nice, I agree it is NOT required ... How you people function in this day and age is beyond me -- Back when EQ1 was first released there was none of this ACT or mod crap -- You counted in your head - Raid Leaders set up clocks and watches and we had every single raid announcement macro'd out cause guess what? No Vent... Its sick how dependent this new generation of gamers is on having to be warned by 3rd party software - It has made all these games easier and the players are much worse than we used to be. I bet you walked uphill both ways to school to when you were a kid. Get over the goold old days. I love these types of post. Yea we did - and I guarantee you we are better players thanMOST of the current players for it...Ive led alot of end-game guilds over the years I can tell you there is generally no better player than an EQ1 veteran... Secondly, I never said it was the "good old days" all I said is that you kids are just not the same caliber of player that they used to be. We have all (Myself included) become lazy and we are worse off because of it. In reponse to watch comments: lol, true that, I guess it is a "3rd Party Device"

06-30-2009, 08:40 PM	#42
Deson Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,754	Trevalon wrote: Ranja wrote: Trevalon wrote: Kordran wrote: vinere wrote: If they want to make act not required.... all mobs need to have a emote 5 sec before a raidwipeing ae... like maestro and his root ~_~ until thats implementied.. ACT is required 4sure =I ACT is not required. You could essentially do the same kinds of things by filtering text, watching your detrimentals and using a stopwatch. ACT is a convenience for experienced raiders and a crutch for inexperienced ones, but not an absolute requirement. While ACT is nice, I agree it is NOT required ... How you people function in this day and age is beyond me -- Back when EQ1 was first released there was none of this ACT or mod crap -- You counted in your head - Raid Leaders set up clocks and watches and we had every single raid announcement macro'd out cause guess what? No Vent... Its sick how dependent this new generation of gamers is on having to be warned by 3rd party software - It has made all these games easier and the players are much worse than we used to be. I bet you walked uphill both ways to school to when you were a kid. Get over the goold old days. I love these types of post. Yea we did - and I guarantee you we are better players thanMOST of the current players for it...Ive led alot of end-game guilds over the years I can tell you there is generally no better player than an EQ1 veteran... Secondly, I never said it was the "good old days" all I said is that you kids are just not the same caliber of player that they used to be. We have all (Myself included) become lazy and we are worse off because of it. In reponse to watch comments: lol, true that, I guess it is a "3rd Party Device" That sounds like Dymus... __________________ I will not let Domino break my doom and gloom. I will not let Domino break my doom and gloom.I will not let Domino break my doom and gloom.I will not let Domino break my doom and gloom.I will not let Domino break...

06-30-2009, 11:35 PM	#43
Kordran Loremaster Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 2,484	Aule@Guk wrote: From a progression point of view, what would your stance be on whether ACT is required for a guild to be able to progress to the next stage? Let's take a guild that is earlier on the progression tree. Perhaps they have killed the Naga, twins in Palace, and the Stalker in YIS, I think we can agree that all of this is doable without timers. If a friend of yours from a guild in that position asked you for advice on progression and you found out that their guild was not using ACT. Would you tell that person that their guild NEEDS to begin using ACT to time AOE's? Would you rate them any chance of successfully moving on to killing Switchmaster, Kultak and Xebnok without timers? Again, this is for a guild at that level of progression. I'm sure many guilds well past that progression point could simply power through the aoe's and rightfully state that timers are not necessary for that fight. Just as avatar guilds can state that killing Zarakon only takes 2 fighters and that bringing more is stupid. Using your nail example, if a carpenter showed up at your house to do some remodeling and you saw them using a rock instead of a hammer and their eyeball as a level, would you not question why they were not using adequate tools to perform their job effectively? Or would you applaud their hardcore style? I would tell them that using ACT is strongly recommended, and that they would be foolish to not use it. But again, it's not an absolute requirement, it's just an incredibly useful tool. Just like the guy pounding the hammers in with a rock, if that's how he prefers to do it, fine, as long as he's not remodeling my house. __________________

07-01-2009, 12:10 AM	#44
Calris Server: Antonia Bayle Guild: Windrunner Trading Company Rank: Herald Loremaster Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 459	feldon30 wrote: kela wrote: Why should SoE be responcable for making sure a Third Party program accually works. Because raiding EQ2 requires a third party program -- ACT. Which is why tons of people do just fine without it. If you think it's required, you're using it as a crutch to shore up lack of skill.

07-01-2009, 01:01 AM	#45
Kordran Loremaster Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 2,484	And honestly, this whole discussion about the usefulness of ACT is beside the point. There is nothing wrong with ACT, there is nothing wrong with the logfile output from the client. Auto-attack damage is still being logged. Timers still work. Life goes on. Edit: And I can't spell.. __________________

07-01-2009, 02:49 AM	#46
Jeepned2 Loremaster Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 595	Ok, I know there are lovers and haters of ACT out there. Everyone seems to have an opinion about even if they have never tried using it before. I'm starting to wonder if Aditu knew how it was going to evolve and the love hate relationship that it has become, if she would have ever let it be known that she wrote the program. Here is a little something that is on her website that give a little history about ACT. I didn't ask her before hand if I post it, but hope it's ok with her. It is located on her ACT website, that unfortunately I can't link to. Some rule about links. I get in enough trouble with the moderators as is. SO.... "ACT started as a learning project to teach myself C# after I first started playing EQ2 in November of 2004. At the time there were very few offerings for log parsers if any. Those that did exist did only basic things at best. I had not started raiding yet, being barely level 15 but I knew from EQ1 that it would be in my future and in order to better understand how the game worked, I would need a reliable log parser. That is essentially the purpose behind the program, to better understand the game. Being a Templar, I did not have a particular care about how much damage I could output in a certain amount of time. Even though that is a popular misconception on the limits of log parsers. As ACT was a learning project, I never had immediate plans on releasing it to the public. I certainly didn't foresee the eventual popularity or even controversy that it would cause." Aditu from her Advanced Combat Tracker website. I'm sure she had no idea back then that ACT would turn out being the discussion of many posts on this forum. This is me just guessing now, but I believe a lot of what caused ACT to become what it is today is people asking her for ACT to do more and more things. I'm guessing also that it just kind of snowballed on her over time. It has to take her a huge amount of her time for updates and everything else that is done with ACT. For as far as I know, it's not like she has some company with a bunch of other people helping with it. But then again, I never asked. All I can tell you is that she is one of the smartest guildmates I have ever had when it comes to understanding all things EQ2. I learned a long time ago not to argue with her in guild chat, unless I just felt the huge need to have my ego crushed that day. ACT has made raiding easier. There is no way around that. I guess I'm confused as to why that's a bad thing. It's just simple evolution. Kind of like going from biplanes (early EQ) to jets (current EQ2) and who knows what next year will bring? Do the Dev's develope content differently because of ACT? I don't know, you would have to ask.... and get an answer from them. (Good luck). For those who talk about the "Good ole days" raiding in EQ, I was one of them also, but hey, time to move on. We have indoor plumbing now, you're allow to come in and join the rest of us.

07-01-2009, 03:01 AM	#47
Spyderbite Server: Venekor Guild: Dark Vengeance Rank: Member Loremaster Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Connecticut Posts: 4,262	Jeepned2 wrote: Do the Dev's develope content differently because of ACT? I doubt the devs take any third party programs into consideration. Which is a good thing. It restricts their ability to develop stuff based on newer technology. I realize that this is a time investment on the the 3rd party's part to adapt to the changes. But, if it becomes too much of a burden then they can either retire the application, code the application to adapt to the changes, or start charging money for use of the application. Anybody who has a problem with it, can easily code their own application. Especially if its that vital to any aspect of the game. (I use ACT for harvesting reasons btw)

07-01-2009, 03:22 AM	#48
Gnova Loremaster Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 60	Thunndar316 wrote: If the game gave visual or audio clues you wouldn't have to use ACT. I never have to fire up something in the background to play Ninja Gaiden. Not sure why this game has to be so vague and secretive. Shouldn't have to go back and read logs, study this, min max that, ect. Just wanna play. /agree One example for this would be the Nex fight. They could have put a "aura" around her that changed colour when your raidforce went above or below the dps thresholds. Let the raidforce stare at the raid target and not at a parse screen on a 2nd monitor to be effective. I did notice at FF that the new animations we were shown had a lot of visual triggers in them just prior to the actual attack. Hopefully allowing playing to take cues from the attack animations for aoes etc..., is the purpose. EQ1 people talking about how "hard" they had it lol? I remember when the simple act of someone having to click a mask when a raidmob gave a emote that the ingame audio triggers could pick up and tell the player to do it used to caused wipes.

07-01-2009, 03:33 AM	#49
Gnova Loremaster Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 60	Spyderbite@Venekor wrote: I doubt the devs take any third party programs into consideration. Which is a good thing. It restricts their ability to develop stuff based on newer technology. Absolutely they take ACT into considerations when designing raid encounters. First they had timed aoes. People started using act to time them to make them trivial. Then they decide to have multiple aoes with separate timers so that it would be even more difficult. People eventually got used to them. Now they have multiple aoes and random whack-a-mole reactive detrimentals so that there is even more to concentrate on since ACT has made aoe jousting trivial, except when the named crosses the streams and bad things happen. Then they add curses to the equation so that people couldn't just self cure. What is next?

07-01-2009, 03:35 AM	#50
Morghus Loremaster Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,105	Gnova wrote: Spyderbite@Venekor wrote: I doubt the devs take any third party programs into consideration. Which is a good thing. It restricts their ability to develop stuff based on newer technology. What is next? From FF: Curing Whack-a-mole ——- Effects that if you cure, it switches to a different effect Some effects you don’t have to cure Some effects you shouldn’t cure ——–

07-01-2009, 03:38 AM	#51
Armawk Server: Everfrost Guild: Nos Es Rutilus Rank: Tirones Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 2,240	Spyderbite@Venekor wrote: I doubt the devs take any third party programs into consideration. Which is a good thing. It restricts their ability to develop stuff based on newer technology. I would be astonished (in fact I would flatly not believe it) if they didnt take into account something so basic as knowing that their raiders will have everything recorded, timed etc. especailly given that devs often refer to parses.. which means act lets face it.

07-01-2009, 08:20 AM	#52
Zarador Loremaster Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 1,194	shaunfletcher wrote: Spyderbite@Venekor wrote: I doubt the devs take any third party programs into consideration. Which is a good thing. It restricts their ability to develop stuff based on newer technology. I would be astonished (in fact I would flatly not believe it) if they didnt take into account something so basic as knowing that their raiders will have everything recorded, timed etc. especailly given that devs often refer to parses.. which means act lets face it. I guess I just look at it the same as I do with UI Mods. It's 3rd party and unless there is a special implied relationship between SoE and the 3rd party, sometimes it's going to conflict and "break". The best way I would imagine to insure rapid repair by the 3rd party programmer would be to support the mod programmers as to provide them with a greater incentive as well as showing that their work is appreciated. It's ironic in many cases when I read the boards over at EQ Interface that some of the most widely used mods out there that players claim they can't play the game without and that have been downloaded thousands of times have to beg for contributions.

07-01-2009, 09:14 AM	#53
Levatino Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Netherlands Posts: 1,285	that's a true statement and not only for programmers of third party software for EQ2. Lots of people want everything for free. So what if making such is time and money consuming so long they get it for free and on time. Cause god forbid if an update (for ACt in this case) don't comes in time.. Also complaining to SOE for third party stuff not being compatible? Hello it's called third party for a reason.. Maybe write something yourself then? What to difficult? Well then you have to wait until ACT or whatecer third-party program comes with an update... Or you could always try to play the game without ofcourse.. Try it you may succeed.. __________________

07-01-2009, 11:27 AM	#54
Yimway Loremaster Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 9,707	Spyderbite@Venekor wrote: Jeepned2 wrote: Do the Dev's develope content differently because of ACT? I doubt the devs take any third party programs into consideration. Which is a good thing. It restricts their ability to develop stuff based on newer technology. They do take into concideration what constitutes a challenge and what is trivial. And when ACT made certain raid mechanics trivial, they designed new ones to create challenge. While they didn't look at ACT and develop differently, they looked at needing to challenge players who were clearly using ACT, so yes ACT caused things to be developed differently. __________________

07-01-2009, 11:29 AM	#55
liveja General Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Foster's Home For Imaginary Friends Posts: 4,793	Spyderbite@Venekor wrote: Jeepned2 wrote: Do the Dev's develope content differently because of ACT? I doubt the devs take any third party programs into consideration. I don't see how they couldn't take them, particularly ACT, into consideration. __________________

07-01-2009, 12:53 PM	#56
Sprin Server: Nagafen Guild: L U S H Rank: LUSH (Supreme Drinker!) General Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 2,364	Trevalon wrote: Kordran wrote: vinere wrote: If they want to make act not required.... all mobs need to have a emote 5 sec before a raidwipeing ae... like maestro and his root ~_~ until thats implementied.. ACT is required 4sure =I ACT is not required. You could essentially do the same kinds of things by filtering text, watching your detrimentals and using a stopwatch. ACT is a convenience for experienced raiders and a crutch for inexperienced ones, but not an absolute requirement. While ACT is nice, I agree it is NOT required ... How you people function in this day and age is beyond me -- Back when EQ1 was first released there was none of this ACT or mod crap -- You counted in your head - Raid Leaders set up clocks and watches and we had every single raid announcement macro'd out cause guess what? No Vent... Its sick how dependent this new generation of gamers is on having to be warned by 3rd party software - It has made all these games easier and the players are much worse than we used to be. LOLZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Some OLD, wanna-look-tough guy who thinks old, out dated things are better, and "evolution / progression / technology" are lame and make you weak wrote: You young whippersnappers these days and your fancy "computers" and "electricity"!!.. back when i was a boy, If we had to talk to someone, we had to walk 20 miles in one direction and knock on their door.. it was more effective than these whatcha-ma-phones they have now adays... It made you into a man... now you weenies just can type things on that big glowing electric box and send v-mails or whatever you call them. Back before electricity things were run smoother and more efficient and effective. We were better people because of it... though we died younger because of diseases and lack of refridgeration made storing food for long periods of time impossible, oh and the lack of any antibiotics or other medication for treating illnesses... but dag-nabit, we were better because of it!.. This hogwash with the talk of "progression" and "evolution"... it makes everyone weak... It was better when you didnt have any wheels, using these fancy "automobiles" to get around... It has made getting to the store easier and all the youngsters much worse then we used to be at getting to the store. Saying that people are weaker/lazy/dumb for using technology is like that old crotchety doctor that still uses his old rusty tools to do a surgery, "cuz thats how it was done in the olden days, so its better"... vs a Doctor that uses the state of the art computers and equipment available to him... which would you think was "stupid and lazy"? Thats what I thought... kk thnx bbyenow

07-01-2009, 01:01 PM	#57
Sprin Server: Nagafen Guild: L U S H Rank: LUSH (Supreme Drinker!) General Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 2,364	And in case any Devs read this forums, cuz they certainly dont read Priest General Forums: http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=452255 Request to get rid of the garbage "lore" clutter in the combat logs and replace it with usefull information, like cures mainly... and after that, if there is room, accurate debuff logs... Thanks Sony... you're a doll

07-01-2009, 02:50 PM	#58
Tehom Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,171	It's not like using a stopwatch to time AEs in EQ1 was some difficult thing. One of my first complaints about EQ2 was that the /time command didn't give seconds so you couldn't use a macro for a timer like you could in EQ1. ACT is an incredibly useful tool, there's no denying that. Aditu deserves endless praise for her all her work in creating it. But I think by far the most useful features of it are for data analysis in determining how mechanics work or the value of different spells and so on, not just for timing AEs or similar things. That's just a small side benefit.

07-01-2009, 02:52 PM	#59
Gilasil Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 907	I agree ACT is not absolutely required. I don't use it myself (for timing attacks I have a window set to show only my own attacks so I can see when the autoattack goes off, on raids OTHERS are doing the timing so I'm not techinally using it and sometimes they DO use stopwatches. We're not very uber. ) It does make life more enjoyable for many players. SoE should either (1) add its functionality to the GUI or (2) design the game so it doesn't have such a huge impact -- i.e. get rid of DPS caps, have emotes before raid wiping AoEs, design autoattack so careful timing is not necessary for maximizing DPS. If they go the second route they should require that all beta testers (those on Test servers and anyone in any beta) NOT have ACT installed -- have something in the GUI which checks for that and refuses to launch if ACT is installed. But until then the fact remains that gameplay is becoming heavily dependent on a third party program. Ok, since this is the same people who brought us grey shard quests I suppose they might not see a problem with that.

07-01-2009, 06:26 PM	#60
ZerkerDwarf Loremaster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 602	I am looking into my localized log file. What do I see? No auto attack (a big file after a right night). Furthermore the localized log file declares all damage and hits to be "1". Probably because no auto attack is logged I am complaining about auto attack not being logged? Of course then there are still some people saying auto attack is logged properly. Maybe the localized log file HAS indeed been bug-patched?! No, of course not. I look into my file and SEE the bugs. But other people maintain everything is fine.